I've watched the growth of this internet NVI/Bates movement start with i-see.org and Alex's original mailing list years ago, and seeing.org, which was already in place when I joined, and on from there. It's growing, and the visitors per day that iblindness.org (and this forum) is now getting is more than I ever expected. If it continues going up it's going to feel overwhelming to me, because I'm not sure what I want to do with the attention of thousands of people. And it's also only a matter of time before a major website posts an article that references iblindness.org and brings the attention to a sudden unexpected climax. So it needs to be ready.
I need to update some articles I wrote and write some new ones, but other than that, I need some big ideas! What does this site need?
David
Site Administrator
"Half of our funny, heathen lives, we are bent double to gather things we have tossed away." - George Meredith
But firstly here's one I've always wondered about in the past -
This website needs videos and demonstrations of Dr. Bates' amazing methods!!
Come on, people! Let's make some good videos! Commence recording!
:o ;D
LOL it's crazy because I was thinking that exact same thing too! In fact right after I read Dave's post that's the first idea that came to my mind.
I've never seen a SINGLE VIDEO that demonstrated Bates' simple techniques. Due to the nature of the method it would obviously be a huge advantage for people learning it. I started to consider making videos of myself demonstrating the techniques (after I have obtained telescopic vision of course ) and posting it on a website that I have visualized myself creating in the future. Or just simply posting it on YouTube! It's a shame the results you get when you search for "bates method" on YouTube.
I think videos of normal- or perfect-sighted people correctly demonstrating the techniques while describing them would be just plain awesome!
The forums are nice, but they have their limits. The biggest disadvantage of using a forum to harbor a large portion of information is that it gets buried. Once in a while someone posts a breakthrough or an explanation of the technique, and then after a while it gets buried and nobody ever finds it.
A lot of information that you wrote, Dave, is posted on the website. However, you can't always be the one writing, and perhaps someone else has a different way of conveying the information, maybe they did more reseach on the topic or has a slightly different outlook which may benefit some readers.
What we can try, is perhaps an open source content management system (such a plone) or a wiki, to which everyone can contribute information. All users would be allowed to post articles about techniques, thoughts, or experiences with specific references to the Bates' literature. These articles would be organized into folders, can be searched, reviewed, commented on, rated and perhaps modified. You can even have review staff to examine articles before they get published, if we get a lot of popularity or junk.
I'm not sure how much participation we'll get, or how successful it will be, so I'm just throwing out the idea. I'm not suggesting we get rid of the forum, but I'm suggesting we separate inspiring or intuitive ideas from questions and useless chat.
This is how wikipedia got so popular. The author of the website doesn't sit there publishing articles, he lets the users cooperate and share information. Everyone has something new to bring to the table, I just find that these new ideas get buried in other posts and are only seen by those who have been around a lot.
I just thought of people like Spock, who did TONS of research, and had very interesting ideas. However, he stopped posting and not many newcomers will go searching for his posts....I wouldn't. However, I definitely read most text on the home page when I came here. If his information was there, I'd read it too.
This would most definitely be an interesting turn to conveying ideas on the Bates method. The truth is, the Bates method is such an open concept that everyone seems to want to write books on it. Why not pool all the information together so everyone can cooperate.
All the NVI and Bates method sites have forums,, which aren't so special. This would definitely catch some eyes.
Any thoughts? Would you guys think something like this would be popular?
The challenge would be to overcome people's shyness and persuade them to share.
Paul
PS: Here is a nice video on plone content management system (it's open source):
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ia301209.us.archive.org/3/items/SeanKellyIntroducingPlone/ploneintro.mov">http://ia301209.us.archive.org/3/items/ ... eintro.mov</a><!-- m -->
I personally thing plone would work the best for us in this case. It has everything.
Videos are a nice touch, I personally do not like to see myself on video .
If you guys are willing, that would be very helpful for younger visitors. These would probably have to be uploaded to youtube or google videos and get linked to this site. I don't think Dave has bandwidth to throw around on videos
There's a blog add-on for this forum that's supposed to be released soon. It looks like it will work well for each user having their own blog, and a list of all users' blogs, and a page showing the newest blog entries of any users, and of course blog comments on each entry from other users. Setting up blog threads for each user wouldn't really work well in the forum as it is, because other users couldn't comment on each blog entry, so I think this will be a nice addition. I'll announce it when it's ready, but I'm not sure when that will be.
David
Site Administrator
"Half of our funny, heathen lives, we are bent double to gather things we have tossed away." - George Meredith
And as far as the wiki idea, it's a good idea, but I'm imagining a lot of misinformation comprising so much of it. I don't know how wikipedia manages what they have so well.
David
Site Administrator
"Half of our funny, heathen lives, we are bent double to gather things we have tossed away." - George Meredith
They implemented a rating and a reviewing system. Plus if someone posts something that people believe to be incorrect, they set a flag and at the top of the page it says "This article contains disputed information." (and a link pointing to the discussion of the article on their message board". Likewise, if the article lacks references or contains a biased opinion, they clearly indicate it at the top of the page and have a link pointing to a thread in a forum where people discuss it.
There are a number of ways to filter misinformation.
One good way is to have articles reviewed/edited by a member of the review staff before it gets posted publicly (usually one person reviews, unless you are overwhelmed).
Another way is to use a rating system. If an article is misguiding, it will most likely receive a bad rating from users. Poorly-rated articles wouldn't be empharized as much, and newcomers would most likely avoid them. The well-rated articles would be listed on the front pages. Alternatively, we can have a draft section (maybe form), in which articles can be discussed, edited, and voted (or rated). Those that receive a certain % of votes after a certain time frame get posted.
Another way is to sparingly distribute usernames to post. Only certain people are allowed to post - but this method defeats the purpose of an "open community".
I just think something like this would be nice because I find myself repeating a lot of things. More importantly, good threads get buried and rarely seen (i.e. someone was wondering about proper reading habits the other day).
Paul A
David Wrote:There's a blog add-on for this forum that's supposed to be released soon. It looks like it will work well for each user having their own blog, and a list of all users' blogs, and a page showing the newest blog entries of any users, and of course blog comments on each entry from other users. Setting up blog threads for each user wouldn't really work well in the forum as it is, because other users couldn't comment on each blog entry, so I think this will be a nice addition. I'll announce it when it's ready, but I'm not sure when that will be.
Paul Wrote:They implemented a rating and a reviewing system. Plus if someone posts something that people believe to be incorrect, they set a flag and at the top of the page it says "This article contains disputed information." (and a link pointing to the discussion of the article on their message board". Likewise, if the article lacks references or contains a biased opinion, they clearly indicate it at the top of the page and have a link pointing to a thread in a forum where people discuss it.
There are a number of ways to filter misinformation.
One good way is to have articles reviewed/edited by a member of the review staff before it gets posted publicly (usually one person reviews, unless you are overwhelmed).
Another way is to use a rating system. If an article is misguiding, it will most likely receive a bad rating from users. Poorly-rated articles wouldn't be empharized as much, and newcomers would most likely avoid them. The well-rated articles would be listed on the front pages. Alternatively, we can have a draft section (maybe form), in which articles can be discussed, edited, and voted (or rated). Those that receive a certain % of votes after a certain time frame get posted.
Another way is to sparingly distribute usernames to post. Only certain people are allowed to post - but this method defeats the purpose of an "open community".
I just think something like this would be nice because I find myself repeating a lot of things. More importantly, good threads get buried and rarely seen (i.e. someone was wondering about proper reading habits the other day).
Paul A
Ratings I would expect to be really off. I would expect an article that would appeal to most people would be the Bates exercises described in a mechanical, simple, clear, and yet utterly wrong way, because that's what people want to see. They don't want to see something that implies depth or subtlety.
Reviewing would make the most sense, I think. But then I would never feel comfortable accepting/denying articles myself, because I don't like offending people who have it mostly right but in my opinion are giving some misleading info.
But I do see your point about a lot of info getting buried beneath what's mostly vague references. My first attempt at resolving this was the Method of the Month forum. I think I might just make some more over there, with a "topic suggestions" thread.
David
Site Administrator
"Half of our funny, heathen lives, we are bent double to gather things we have tossed away." - George Meredith
There's sort of still a Wordpress blog type thing installed, but it worked out really really badly. I haven't looked at any others, but I'm open to ideas.
Dave
Site Administrator
"Half of our funny, heathen lives, we are bent double to gather things we have tossed away." - George Meredith
Make a Adobe PDF E-Book of your entire forum: all old and new posts.
I did this partially for Sorris's blog. Its great! Lots information.
Adobe is word searchable and people can search quickly for all posts.
You can also place a index.
Adobe allows free limited MB conversion so readers can add on new PDF's to the book as new posts are added.
People can download the E-book from Iblindness.org
Viedos are good idea.
I have a few basic ones on Youtube but need voice... improvement.
They are made with Camstudio free software. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1MWGeF0iU4
) and posting it on a website that I have visualized myself creating in the future. Or just simply posting it on YouTube! It's a shame the results you get when you search for "bates method" on YouTube.
